Macy, Michael
Communication is All You Need: Persuasion Dataset Construction via Multi-LLM Communication
Ma, Weicheng, Zhang, Hefan, Yang, Ivory, Ji, Shiyu, Chen, Joice, Hashemi, Farnoosh, Mohole, Shubham, Gearey, Ethan, Macy, Michael, Hassanpour, Saeed, Vosoughi, Soroush
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown proficiency in generating persuasive dialogue, yet concerns about the fluency and sophistication of their outputs persist. This paper presents a multi-LLM communication framework designed to enhance the generation of persuasive data automatically. This framework facilitates the efficient production of high-quality, diverse linguistic content with minimal human oversight. Through extensive evaluations, we demonstrate that the generated data excels in naturalness, linguistic diversity, and the strategic use of persuasion, even in complex scenarios involving social taboos. The framework also proves adept at generalizing across novel contexts. Our results highlight the framework's potential to significantly advance research in both computational and social science domains concerning persuasive communication.
Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language
Davidson, Thomas (Cornell University) | Warmsley, Dana (Cornell University) | Macy, Michael (Cornell University) | Weber, Ingmar (Hamad Bin Khalifa University)
A key challenge for automatic hate-speech detection on social media is the separation of hate speech from other instances of offensive language. Lexical detection methods tend to have low precision because they classify all messages containing particular terms as hate speech and previous work using supervised learning has failed to distinguish between the two categories. We used a crowd-sourced hate speech lexicon to collect tweets containing hate speech keywords. We use crowd-sourcing to label a sample of these tweets into three categories: those containing hate speech, only offensive language, and those with neither. We train a multi-class classifier to distinguish between these different categories. Close analysis of the predictions and the errors shows when we can reliably separate hate speech from other offensive language and when this differentiation is more difficult. We find that racist and homophobic tweets are more likely to be classified as hate speech but that sexist tweets are generally classified as offensive. Tweets without explicit hate keywords are also more difficult to classify.